AI Rate Professor

English

Cherrelle Holden

ENGWR302 · ENG301 · 12 lifetime ratings

AI rating
24/100
RMP rating
1.9/5
Take again
23.08%
Difficulty
3.8

The decision

unless you and a heavy essay workload.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUnclear InstructionsSlow FeedbackTough Essay GradingHeavy PapersPoor Online Presence
  • Most online reviews , and poor responsiveness.
  • Students often earn high grades, but many say the , and unrewarding.
  • In-person reviews are also mostly negative, citing busy work, bias concerns, and .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

62/100

Many students report A-range grades, but they describe the path as , and dependent on persistence.

Online students often still earned high grades despite poor support, while but less enthusiasm.

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The content is not always described as hard, but vague instructions and material itself.

Online difficulty is driven by confusion and , while and paper volume.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

55/100

Reviews do .

Neither online nor in-person .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

24/100

Most students do not recommend her because of , and disorganization.

Online reviews are strongly negative, and partial exception.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

35/100

Students frequently mention stern or , though many still received high grades.

Format shift

, while in-person comments focus more on workload and course value.

Workload

Heavy

25/100

Students repeatedly mention lots of essays, reading, discussion posts, and busy work.

Format shift

Both formats show heavy writing work, with online reviews adding confusion and .

Teaching experience

Poor

28/100

Most reviews describe unclear , and unreliable support.

Format shift

Online teaching is rated especially poorly, while but still mostly criticized.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

18/100

, and written assignments rather than exams.

Format shift

Both online and and assignments, with .

Luni fit check

Weigh these signals against your actual schedule.

Get help balancing workload, grading, and timing when no option is an obvious fit.

Course format

Compare the in-person and online experience.

Classroom format

In person

3 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

and busy work, with serious concerns about professionalism and bias alongside one more positive account.

Main concern

The main concern is perceived bias, busy work, and a .

What students said

“Just busy work and boring classes.”
ENG301
“This teacher is unprofessional and openly biased.”
ENG301
“She is not all that bad.”
ENGWR302

Remote format

Online

10 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are mostly negative, with repeated complaints about unclear , and lots of essays.

Main concern

The main concern is unreliable online teaching support and .

What students said

“ .”
ENG301
“The worst ever. So and .”
ENGWR302
“ and she graded them super tough, and LOTS of essays.”
ENG301

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews focus on essays and assignments, and they do not clearly prove a traditional exam policy, proctoring, open-book rules, or .

Essay HeavyDiscussion PostsFew Clear Exam Details

Assessment risk

Varies

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and listed assignments, but do not clearly prove a .

Many PapersAssignment Based
“We wrote so so .”
ENG301
“All of .”
ENGWR302

Online

Online reviews emphasize essays, assignments, discussion posts, and , but do not clearly prove webcam, proctoring, Lockdown Browser, open-book, midterm, or .

Essay HeavyDiscussion PostsFew Clear Exam Details
“Her class has 4 major essays to cover in the whole semester.”
ENG301
“I had to turn in first essay.”
ENGWR302
“ and she graded them super tough, and LOTS of essays.”
ENG301

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“pick literally any other professor for ENGWR300 besides her.”

Voice snapshots generated from 13 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and communication. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

28/100

“The worst ever. So and .”

📉 Recommendation Risk

24/100

“ !!!”

⚖️

35/100

“ and she graded them super tough, and LOTS of essays.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • .
  • .
  • The professor felt absent for most of the semester

Theme 2

📚

  • Her class has 4 major essays to cover in the whole semester.
  • We wrote so so .
  • LOTS of essays.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Course Organization

  • All of
  • uses old material with
  • changes due dates last minute

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

13

Recent reviews read by the AI

12

Lifetime ratings

91/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is high because 13 reviews across recent years and both formats show repeated, detailed complaints with a consistent pattern.

Inside 13 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 51
3 out of 51
2 out of 53
1 out of 57

Course coverage

ENG3019 reviews
ENGWR3024 reviews

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

12 reported outcomes

A range

10

A+ 2 · A 7 · A- 1

B range

0

No reported values

C range

1

C+ 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Not sure yet 1